On 22 March 2011 12:26, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> wrote: > So here, concretely, is what I'm contemplating: > > 1. Strings will have unspecified internal representation, but well-formed > strings will contain code points, not code units.
Where by contain, you mean what, exactly? yield when iterated? yield when indexed? Did we ever determine a case for non-typesafe (ie, in terms of code units rather than code points) indexing? If not, how will users ever see that these strings are not vectors of code points? > 3. The string accessor notion can be extended to other things such as code > units. Is the behaviour of such an accessor not necessarily defined, or are we expected to provide accessors that give results for specific normalisations? Have I mixed up my units and points again? -- William Leslie _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
